Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Religion
Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)
Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Baptists -- Doctrines; Theology, Doctrinal
_Deut. 33:2_—“_Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy
ones_”; _Ps. 68:17_—“_The chariots of God are twenty thousand,
even thousands upon thousands_”; _Dan. 7:10_—“_thousands of
thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand
stood before him_”; _Rev. 5:11_—“_I heard a voice of many angels
... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand,
and thousands of thousands._” Anselm thought that the number of
lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life
after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the
number of angelic spirits. They “said that a man, if he threw a
stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery,
asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so
doing.” So in W. H. H. Murray’s time it was said to be dangerous
in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.
(_b_) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.
_Mat. 22:30_—“_they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but
are as angels in heaven_”; _Luke 20:36_—“_neither can they die any
more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God._”
We are called “_sons of men_,” but angels are never called “_sons
of angels_,” but only “_sons of God_.” They are not developed from
one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together
as binds together the race of man. They have no common character
and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel
fell by himself. Humanity fell all at once in its first father.
Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so
many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy.
See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why
salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels.
Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature
of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take.
See _Heb. 2:16_—“_not to angels doth he give help._” The angels
are “_sons of God_,” as having no earthly parentage and no
parentage at all except the divine. _Eph. 3:14, 15_—“_the Father,
of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,_”—not
“_every family_,” as in R. V., for there are no families among the
angels. The marginal rendering “_fatherhood_” is better than
“_family_,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge,
Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a
mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance,
nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a
society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two
worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs
of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God
comes nearer to man than to his angels.” Newman Smyth, Through
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account